back to learners, meaning-making together, applying theory to practice and vice-versa, structuring for dissonance, multiple perspectives etc., can contribute to lifelong learning and ‘mastery’ (SkillsFuture, 2015). The ability to work with multiple perspectives, to be creative, to be able to offer and receive true critique and develop creative solutions are all hallmarks of knowledge workers. Dialogical teaching offers an important alternative to monologic teaching; it is the former that better meets the needs of today’s, and the future workforce. In the following section we move from comparing the two case studies, to exploring what our findings mean conceptually, building on Wells (1999) spiral of knowing.
5.1. “Rising above’ the two case studies Using the vernacular of knowledge building, this section is a “rise above” of the two case studies; in which we seek to develop a deeper understanding of dialogic teaching based on the evidence analysed in the previous two chapters. In this section, we examine, from course design and the experience of learners, key elements of dialogic teaching and learning that have worked well in the courses. These have implications for designing and implementing dialogic teaching approach for adult learners. We will also examine challenges faced by learners and the educators, and the possible ways to resolve or reduce some of the hurdles for dialogic teaching. In developing our model of dialogic teaching, we consulted the spiral of knowing proposed by Gordon Wells (1999), who held that Knowing starts with personal experience which, amplified by information, is transformed through knowledge building into understanding, where understanding is construed as knowing that is oriented to action of personal and social significance and to the continual enriching of the framework within which future experience will be interpreted (p. 85). Wells’ spiral of knowing involves several key elements: experience, information, knowledge building, and consequently enhanced understanding, all of which were discussed in the previous two chapters. However, we found that deepening of understanding involves meta-cognition and can contribute to changed identities either as a learner and/or as a particular type of practitioner. We consider these to be outcomes that grow and develop through multiple iterations and opportunities, as shown in Figure 5.1 which we have called the dialogic teaching model.
69
